Bantu Expansion

Status
Not open for further replies.

Apollo

VIP
That is ridiculous. Any serious historian can read the thread Yusuf and Ahmad

https://www.somalispot.com/threads/yusuf-and-ahmad.48176/#post-1320180

and see the difference between actual history and the falsified Somali pages at Wikipedia. Anybody can check my links because I use them.The Anti-Somali slander is false. It is the false history that is offensive and wrong, not the real history. It is you with the political agenda, denying the Minorities their past.

Anti-Somali Grant,

They are not minorities. Bantus are the majority in Africa. Ethnic Somalis are the true minorities in Africa.

Lastly, the Bantu importation happened before mass literacy and the genealogy of slaves is not something important scholars of the past would bother writing about. At the end of the day, they are still Bantus with heavy Niger-Congo roots. The end.
 
They are not minorities. Bantus are the majority in Africa. Ethnic Somalis are the true minorities.

Lastly, this all happened before mass literacy and the genealogy of slaves is not something important scholars of the past would bother writing about. At the end of the day, they are still Bantus with heavy Niger-Congo roots. The end.

Somali Minorities are a different issue, and there is an important distinction to be made about timing and slave origins. There is no historical evidence for the Gabawiin, Shabelli, Makanne, Shidle, or the Aytiire being imported, and good evidence, accepted by the UN among others,.that they preceded the Ajuraan in Somalia..

Factz' map is after the Omani acquisition of Zanzibar, whose slave trade with Somalia began about 1825.

I see you are again altering my posts to conform with your own views. That may be a Mod's privilege, but it is highly unprofessional and just nasty.
 
Last edited:

madaxweyne

madaxweyne
VIP
Somali Minorities are a different issue, and there is an important distinction to be made about timing and slave origins. There is no historical evidence for the Gabawiin, Shabelli, Makanne, Shidle, or the Aytiire being imported, and good evidence, accepted by the UN among others,.that they preceded the Ajuraan in Somalia..

Factz' map is after the Omani acquisition of Zanzibar, whose slave trade with Somalia began about 1825.

I see you are again altering my posts to conform with your own views. That may be a Mod's privilege, but it is highly unprofessional and just nasty.
great debate sorry to say @Grant your arguments where flawed and showed a clear bias towards the bantus without providing any substantial evidence that they existed thier before cushitic somalis you even tried to say they where native when that is a flawed term in itself
so becosue the khoisan where their before somalis , somalis should therfore give their land to the bantus even thought they came before them makes no sence or that bantus are somehow native

i could hardly take you serious anymore, i would stick with @Factz and @Apollo on this one
 
great debate sorry to say @Grant your arguments where flawed and showed a clear bias towards the bantus without providing any substantial evidence that they existed thier before cushitic somalis you even tried to say they where native when that is a flawed term in itself
so becosue the khoisan where their before somalis , somalis should therfore give their land to the bantus even thought they came before them makes no sence or that bantus are somehow native

i could hardly take you serious anymore, i would stick with @Factz and @Apollo on this one

Duh. Nobody says the Bantus are native. James Allen says 9th century in the Lower Jubba and the Shabelli plain.. The consensus is just that they preceded the Ajuraan. See Luling or any of the UN papers on the Somali Minorities.

The evidence of the Rifle Range Site is that the Eyle are as close to native as that exists, going back 20K.

https://usm.maine.edu/sites/default/files/geography-anthropology/Hunter-gatherer reliance on inseelbergs, big game, and dwarf antelope at the Rifle Range Site, Buur Hakaba, southern Somalia.pdf

upload_2018-12-12_18-30-38-png.61279
 

Apollo

VIP
Duh. Nobody says the Bantus are native. James Allen says 9th century in the Lower Jubba and the Shabelli plain.. The consensus is just that they preceded the Ajuraan. See Luling or any of the UN papers on the Somali Minorities.

The evidence of the Rifle Range Site is that the Eyle are as close to native as that exists, going back 20K.

https://usm.maine.edu/sites/default/files/geography-anthropology/Hunter-gatherer reliance on inseelbergs, big game, and dwarf antelope at the Rifle Range Site, Buur Hakaba, southern Somalia.pdf

upload_2018-12-12_18-30-38-png.61279

Stop misattributing scientific facts, I warn you.

The Eeyle are ethnically similar to the Boni/Aweer who have been tested genetically and they are heavily Bantu admixed.

They are not more native to Somalia than ethnic Somalis, if the Boni/Aweer are anything to go by.

Somalia's pre-agricultural population is gone and has been absorbed by ethnic Somalis. No single population today has any claim to them and most certainly not exogenous Somali Bantus.
 
Stop misattributing scientific facts, I warn you.

The Eeyle are similar to the Boni/Aweer who have been tested genetically and they are heavily Bantu admixed. They are not more native to Somalia than ethnic Somalis if the Boni/Aweer are anything to go by.


There are no misattributions there. I do not disagree the Eyle are similar to the Boni-Aweer or that they are admixed,. none of which changes the Eyle archaeology or the dating of the Ajuraan.

The consensus is that the Bantus preceded the Ajuraan and I have seen no one argue the Eyle do not go back 20K.
 

madaxweyne

madaxweyne
VIP
Duh. Nobody says the Bantus are native. James Allen says 9th century in the Lower Jubba and the Shabelli plain.. The consensus is just that they preceded the Ajuraan. See Luling or any of the UN papers on the Somali Minorities.

The evidence of the Rifle Range Site is that the Eyle are as close to native as that exists, going back 20K.

https://usm.maine.edu/sites/default/files/geography-anthropology/Hunter-gatherer reliance on inseelbergs, big game, and dwarf antelope at the Rifle Range Site, Buur Hakaba, southern Somalia.pdf

upload_2018-12-12_18-30-38-png.61279
again sir what do you mean by natives , that is a flawed term in itself
besides Eeyle are ethnically similar to the Boni/Aweer an their practically somalis who are mxied with others

what native popultation are you talking about ???????
hopefully you dont mean bantus
 

Apollo

VIP
There are no misattributions there. I do not disagree the Eyle are similar to the Boni-Aweer or that they are admixed,. none of which changes the Eyle archaeology or the dating of the Ajuraan.

The consensus is that the Bantus preceded the Ajuraan and I have seen no one argue the Eyle do not go back 20K.

Ethnic Somalis descend from the pre-agricultural population of Somalia, significantly more so than the Eyle or Somali Bantus. Next.
 

madaxweyne

madaxweyne
VIP
what does @Grant mean by native popultations @Apollo
is he suggesting that bantus are native or somalis are not native and therfore dont
have a claim to their lands
what is this pre agricultural population
 

Apollo

VIP
what does @Grant mean by native popultations @Apollo
is he suggesting that bantus are native or somalis are not native and therfore dont
have a claim to their lands
what is this pre agricultural population

They don't exist anymore. At least not the East Horn/Somalia-specific ones.

Just like there are no European pre-agricultural populations. They have been absorbed by the Neolithic groups.
 

madaxweyne

madaxweyne
VIP
They don't exist anymore. At least not the East Horn/Somalia-specific ones.

Just like there are no European pre-agricultural populations. They have been absorbed by the Neolithic groups.
so in @Grant logic that would mean europeans are not native becosue the pre agricultral population was wiped out by invaders during the neolithic period by levant farmers, around the same time those same levant migrants arrived in somalia
who grants traces his male haplogroup line back to :cosbyhmm:


it seems grants is holding on to the tile as a guy who misinterprets facts to forge a fake notion of somalis, aka Anti somali @Grant
 
They don't exist anymore. At least not the East Horn/Somalia-specific ones.

Just like there are no European pre-agricultural populations. They have been absorbed by the Neolithic groups.

I have mtDna of U5a2a, downstream from Paleolithic Cheddar Man, dated to about 11KBP in the west of England.

Escaped slaves joined Native American tribes in the Americas. Does this mean the native tribes did not precede them? At least you admit there was a pre-agricultural population. The Eyle record, as mixed as the Eyle may be today, goes back 20K, and the Eyle themselves, reduced as they are, are still there.

Geeljiire's answers to his questions are in my response to him above, which he seems intentionally not to be able to read. Perhaps another go?

https://www.somalispot.com/threads/bantu-expansion.56855/page-4#post-1559606
 
/Thread split from North African brother & others confront the Somali nationalist's hatred for Arabs



The Tana river is in Kenya, not Somalia.

As for Madowweyne Bantus, they all descend from Malawian and Tanzanian slaves brought by Benadiri and Arab merchants. None of them naturally migrated to Somalia. I don't buy this revisionist crap written centuries after the fact often by people with Bantu ancestry with an agenda or who use said individuals for citations.

Ethnic Cushitic Somalis are the sole natives to Somalia, nobody else is. The rest are recent migrants one way or another.

Moreover, all of them are mixed with the enslaved Bantus. So my initial argument holds.

Whatever your argument will be next, at the end of the day they are still Bantus from Eastern Nigeria/Southern Cameroon (Western Africa). All serious anthropologists agree on this. These people are in no way shape or form native to Somalia.
The only person being revisionist here is you.
 
56FE3086-33BA-45E2-8B74-660BA03C47F2.png
52514DF1-900B-40A7-9673-F0AB628F0F8E.png

Why do you revisionists keep saying we came during the Middle Ages? This was written in 1504 by the Portuguese! Arabs were already established by this time.
 

Apollo

VIP
View attachment 65707 View attachment 65706
Why do you revisionists keep saying we came during the Middle Ages? This was written in 1504 by the Portuguese! Arabs were already established by this time.

You do realize that you are actually helping my side of the argument with those facts. I have been saying that Arab, Persian, and Northwest Indian groups have been present on Somalia's South coast for hundreds of years and have been trading enslaved Southeast Africans while they were there.
 
You do realize that you are actually helping my side of the argument with those facts. I have been saying that Arab, Persian, and Northwest Indian groups have been present on Somalia's South coast for hundreds of years and have been trading enslaved Southeast Africans while they were there.

"Initially exporting raw materials such as ivory, ambergris, dark woods, and incense, the coastal towns began producing and exporting cloth by the fourteenth century when Ibn Battuta recorded impressions of his visit. Evidence from Portuguese travelers from the sixteenth and seventeenth century indicates that urban families used slaves in the textile industry, and probably also in domestic service. These slaves were most likely Abyssinian as European visitors in the mid-ninteenth century noted the trade in Abyssinian slaves from Harar."

Catherine Besteman, Unraveling Somalia, pages 49-50.

"The production of items like durra, sesame, orchella, and cotton in quantities sufficient to meet the needs of the local market and, to an increasing extent, those of the foreign, was made possible by the importation in the Banaadir of a new supply of agricultural labor: black slaves from the Swahili coast to the south. Limited slave trading almost certainly had been going on for several centuries and consisted chiefly of the export, on a small scale of Oromo captives to the Middle East.The heyday of the import trade, however, appears to be linked with the emergence of Zanzibar as a commercial power in East Africa. The earliest dates that can be isolated with any certainty fall around 1800, when Zigua slaves from the Mrima coast were brought to the Bajuni islands and perhaps Baraawe. By the 1830s and 1840s, slaves were being carried in Arab dhows to the Somalilands in increasing numbers: six hundred landed at Muqdisho in 1846."

Lee V. Cassanelli, The Shaping of Somali Society, pages, 168-169

It is clear from Cassanelli and others that the Ajuraan exploited local populations and did not import slaves. The Gosha and Mushunguli began arriving only after 1800 and large numbers only began arriving at mid century. The claim the Somali Bantu all arrived in Somalia as slaves is bogus.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Trending

Latest posts

Top